Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783825 Orcan Ogetbil <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #24 from Orcan Ogetbil <[email protected]> 2012-03-29 22:11:43 EDT --- My comments: * The license tag should be MIT: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/MIT#Old_Style_with_legal_disclaimer_2 * The description of the gtk subpackage is the same as the qt package. Copy/paste error? At this point I want to question the rationale of splitting the package into subpackages. Why do we need this? If we really need this please make the descriptions more descriptive, as "This package contains the Qt library for %{name}." is ambiguous for such a package. ! I need to make a note that in Fedora the Qt4 packages usually use BuildRequires: qt4-devel - The rpmlints suil-gtk.x86_64: W: no-documentation suil-qt.x86_64: W: no-documentation suil.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolkits -> toolkit, tool kits, tool-kits suil.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time, run-time, rudiment can be ignored -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
